Written Answers Thursday 31 August 2006

Scottish Executive

Fisheries

Eleanor Scott (Highlands and Islands) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will ensure that all relevant authorities take account of their duties under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP), underpinned by the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004, to ensure that the appropriate special area of conservation management schemes are adequate to protect the sublittoral sands and gravel habitats that they contain before any decision is taken to reopen any areas within the Firth of Lorn Special Area of Conservation to scallop dredging.

Ross Finnie: Regulation 34 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats & C) Regulations 1994 includes provision for relevant authorities to establish management schemes for Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Regulation 35 allows ministers to give directions to relevant authorities on such schemes.

  The Firth of Lorn SAC was designated for rocky reefs, not sublittoral sands and gravel banks. There is no statutory requirement, therefore, to include sublittoral sand and gravel in a management scheme for the site. These habitats are, however, recognised in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan as priority habitats. More information on the plan is available at http://www.ukbap.org.uk/habitats.aspx. Scottish ministers introduced a biodiversity duty in the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 which places a duty on all public bodies to further the conservation of biodiversity when exercising their core functions and produced guidance for public bodies to assist them in complying with the duty: http://www.biodiversityscotland.gov.uk/index.php.

  The Scottish Executive would take account of the requirements of the Habitats Directive and the biodiversity duty prior to agreeing any proposals to remove the restrictions on scallop dredging in the Firth of Lorn Special Area of Conservation.

Fisheries

Eleanor Scott (Highlands and Islands) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will ensure implementation of the Firth of Lorn management committee’s agreement that research should be independent and peer reviewed, and that fishermen and other interested parties, such as local recreation and tourism operators, should be given an opportunity to provide input to the research should the proposed assessment of the effects of mobile fishing gear in the Firth of Lorn Special Area of Conservation be carried out and, if so, by what means it will ensure this.

Ross Finnie: Both the methodology proposed for and the outputs from the research into the possible impacts of scallop dredging in the Firth of Lorn marine Special Area of Conservation will be peer reviewed. The work will be overseen by a stakeholder liaison group.

Fisheries

Eleanor Scott (Highlands and Islands) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has taken account of the reviews of scientific literature and conservation advice provided by the Countryside Commission for Wales and English Nature to inform the decisions to close the Pen Llŷn a’r Sarnau Special Area of Conservation and Lyme Bay to protect rocky reefs when determining whether spending public money on research into the effects of scallop dredging represents best value.

Ross Finnie: The research into the scallop dredging on the Firth of Lorn marine Special Area of Conservation will provide information on the possible physical impact in this site of this type of fishing and address the issue of the deposition of sediment. It will also provide information which is relevant elsewhere. The work will involve a review of relevant literature.

Fisheries

Eleanor Scott (Highlands and Islands) (Green): To ask the Scottish Executive, in light of the advice from Scottish Natural Heritage that it is not currently possible to rule out damaging impacts from scallop dredging on the Firth of Lorn Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and in light of the findings of the European Court of Justice in case C-127/02, whether there will be an appropriate assessment of the potential impact of scallop dredging, in accordance with the requirements of Article 6(3) of the Habitats and Species Directive, before any decision is made on whether to re-open the fishery in the Firth of Lorn SAC.

Ross Finnie: Any decision to reopen the Firth of Lorn marine Special Area Of Conservation once it has been closed would be subject to an appropriate assessment under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive.

National Statistics

Murray Tosh (West of Scotland) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the announcement by the Office for National Statistics that it will start accounting for finance leased debts, principally those arising from PPP or PFI projects, what effect this accounting change will have (a) retrospectively on its spending to date, (b) on its budget and on actual expenditure in cash terms, in the current financial year and (c) on its budget and actual expenditure in the subsequent years for which outline spending targets exist.

Mr Tom McCabe: The announcement by the Office of National Statistics relates solely to information prepared and published by them and reflects a move to adopt generally accepted accounting practice already adopted by other bodies including the Scottish Executive. Therefore the change will have

  (a) no effect retrospectively on its spending to date;

  (b) no effect on its budget and on actual expenditure in cash terms in the current financial year, and

  (c) in the subsequent years for which outline spending targets exist.

Non-Domestic Rates

Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many businesses qualify for a reduction in non-domestic rates under the Small Business Rates Relief Scheme, broken down by the percentage reduction related to the rateable value of premises.

Mr Tom McCabe: The latest available information (1 July 2006) shows that 141,724 non-domestic subjects qualify for a reduction in non-domestic rates under the Small Business Rates Relief Scheme (SBRRS).

  The breakdown of these subjects by potential percentage reduction is contained in the following table:

  Subjects by Rateable Value Band at 1 July 2006

  

 Rateable Value
 Number of Subjects
 Potential SBRRS Discount1


 Less than £3,5002
 76,409
 50%


£3,500 or above but under £4,500
 13,933
 40%


£4,500 or above but under £5,750
 14,957
 30%


£5,750 or above but under £7,000
 10,630
 20%


£7,000 or above but under £8,000
 7,159
 10%


£8,000 or above but less than or equal to £11,500
 18,636
 5%



  Source: Scottish Assessors Association.

  Notes:

  1. The exact level of relief depends on:

  (i) the total rateable value of all subjects occupied by the rate-payer, and

  (ii) whether or not the property is eligible for one of the existing non discretionary rate reliefs.

  If a subject is eligible for an existing non discretionary rate reliefs then it already qualifies for at least a 50 per cent rate relief which is why the small business rate relief is limited to 5% in these circumstances.

  2. Does not include subjects with zero rateable value.

Parenting

David McLetchie (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many parenting orders have been (a) applied for by the Principal Reporter and (b) subsequently granted in each year since their introduction, broken down by local authority area.

Peter Peacock: A parenting order should only be considered where a parent has been offered help and support on a voluntary basis and has refused to engage with this support.

  No parenting orders have yet been applied for or granted.

Parenting

David McLetchie (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con): To ask the Scottish Executive how many parenting orders have been (a) applied for by local authorities and (b) subsequently granted in each year since their introduction, broken down by local authority area.

Peter Peacock: A parenting order should (or can) only be considered where a parent has been offered help and support on a voluntary basis and has refused to engage with this support. The Executive has offered funds to local authorities to establish such support services and many offers of such help have been taken up.

  No parenting orders have yet been applied for or granted.

Pre-School Education

Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how many children (a) took up and (b) were eligible for free (i) nursery, (ii) playgroup and (iii) day care provision for three and four-year-olds in each year since 1999.

Robert Brown: All children are legally entitled to free pre-school education. The age at which they are eligible is set down in The Provision of School Education for Children under School Age (Prescribed Children) (Scotland) Order 2002. Free provision in nurseries, playgroups and day care is also available to some children. However, this is generally discretionary and provided on the basis of need, in accordance with the policy of the relevant local authority.

  The information requested is therefore only available for pre-school education services. The number of children who receive pre-school education or child care, and the number and percentage of three and four year olds registered for pre-school education each year from 1999-2004 is published in Pre-school and Childcare Statistics 2004 (Bib. number 33362) and 2005 figures are published in Pre-school and Childcare Statistics 2005 (Bib. number 40112).

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Brian Adam (Aberdeen North) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive how much money, seized under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, has been given to each local authority in each year since the act came into force.

Hugh Henry: Money recovered under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in any one year is available for reinvestment the following year. The funding available in 2003-04 and 2004-05 was used for the national Drug Dealers Don’t Care campaign in early 2005. Apart from the funding for this national campaign, the resources made available through the act have not been allocated on a local authority basis. In 2006, it was decided to test the impact of using these resources to invest in visible community initiatives. Due to the limited funds available the decision was made to concentrate on the six areas in Scotland which are hardest hit by violent crime. The six local authorities (Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverclyde, North Ayrshire, Renfrewshire and West Dunbartonshire) will benefit from roughly £2 million of reinvestment this year. This includes provision of Twilight Basketball and a localised Drug Dealers Don’t Care, Do You? campaign. The individual local authorities can get funding up to £250,000 if they come forward with meaningful proposals under four core themes of sports initiatives in the evening and weekend; vehicle related packages such as CCTV and graffiti clear up vans or community transport; school packages which could include after hours clubs or youth outreach work, and localised Drug Dealers Don’t Care, Do You? campaign.